Re: glibc error again
On Wed, 2011-07-27 at 22:57 -0400, Bill Cunningham wrote: Ok thanks all. I see. I will check it out. Once I build this 5.1 would I be able to go to 6.8 immediately? No, don't do that - LFS 5.1 is itself an ancient version, from 2005 or so. Bruce probably only mentioned it because it was the last version that supported a 2.4 kernel. And because it used a 2.4 kernel, it would be useless for building any recent version for the same reason as your RH9. Just find a live disk of some recent distro, and use that as a host - Ubuntu is good, someone else suggested Gentoo. You don't actually need to install it - just boot off a CD or USB stick, and build the packages from there. Forget about Redhat 9 - it's just too old. Simon. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: glibc error again
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 2:52 AM, Simon Geard delga...@ihug.co.nz wrote: Just find a live disk of some recent distro, and use that as a host - Ubuntu is good, someone else suggested Gentoo. You don't actually need to install it - just boot off a CD or USB stick, and build the packages from there. Forget about Redhat 9 - it's just too old. Or just simply burn an image of Knoppix and you will be fine. -- William Immendorf The ultimate in free computing. Messages in plain text, please, no HTML. GPG key ID: 1697BE98 If it's not signed, it's not from me. -- Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master. Richard Stallman -- Are you a Gmail user? Please read this important notice: http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/jstrap/gmail?31450. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: glibc error again
William Immendorf wrote: On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 2:52 AM, Simon Geard delga...@ihug.co.nz wrote: Just find a live disk of some recent distro, and use that as a host - Ubuntu is good, someone else suggested Gentoo. You don't actually need to install it - just boot off a CD or USB stick, and build the packages from there. Forget about Redhat 9 - it's just too old. Or just simply burn an image of Knoppix and you will be fine. I have a livecd of lfs. I think that will do. now if I could just figure out how to get the system running with it. I will look closely at the docs. Bill -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: glibc
William Immendorf wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Bill Cunningham bill...@suddenlink.net
wrote:
  Ok. It's there. I have solved this problem. And another has arisen. I am
running an old RH 9 32 bit OS on a AMD athelon 64 bit address bus processor.
(FYI: It's spelled Athlon, not Athelon.)
Your CDO is showing :-)
CDO is like OCD, but the letters are in the right order.
The OS that you are using is not adquadate for building LFS 6.8. The
book recommends a host system that is like or newer than LFS 6.3,
which is dated around late 2007. Redhat 9 was released around 2003 or
so, and that tells me right there that your host system is way too old
to build on.
Since the C programming language is built upon a virtual machine
concept, and the sources for the tools are all written in C, AFAIK,
then what is the problem. Any machine which supports the necessary
constructs should be able to emit the code necessary. One should be
able to build for the PC using a MAC, ISTM.
What is the issue? Does the GCC have special hooks into the
kernel or sth like that?
Mac
--
p=p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);};main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
Oppose globalization and One World Governments like the UN.
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: LFS 6.8 Udev-166 query Problem Solved.
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 07:37:14PM +0100, ga ho wrote:
Hi All,
On my LFS 6.4 system with Udev-130 I had to use the
OPTIONS+=all_partitions in a udev rule to get my Sandisk
Cruzer Micro 8GB USB stick EXT3 partition /dev/ubb1 set up.
However it seems that the Udev developers in their
infinite wisdom decided to do away with the
OPTIONS+=all_partitions so now although udev creates the
/dev/ubb device it no longer creates /dev/ubb1.
Does anyone know of another work around?
I had thought of putting a mknod command in a shell
script and use a rule with the RUN or PROGRAM option to
execute the shell script, but the test shell script I
created to echo some text to a file in the /root directory
doesn't run.
Does Udev have log file that I could check for
errors?
Thanks,
Gary
I've never heard of /dev/ubX until now. All of my
USB sticks have
appeared at /dev/sdX for as long as I can remember [ but, I
think I
didn't get any sticks until 2007 ]. A quick google
suggests that
/dev/ubX has been replaced by /dev/sdX in at least one
distro, so my
first suggestion is that you check to see if the stick
appears as
your next sd device. None of my usb sticks or disks,
or indeed
cameras, has more than one partition - but I've never had
to worry
about any of them showing up as a device without
partitions.
Ah - further googling found the Low Performance USB Block
driver
(BLK_DEV_UB) in the kernel. The driver I'm using is
usb-storage
(USB_STORAGE - you might perhaps want other choices below
that, but
I don't need any for the sticks I have.).
That, of course, may raise another problem - if your stick
used to
be /dev/ubb then presumably you had something at /dev/uba
and that
too might move.
I don't know of any udev logging, my devices all show up
in sys.log
and kern.log and I just go from there.
My latest systems have udev-165, and on that the
properties of a
device showing up at /dev/sdX can be accessed with
/sbin/udevadm info --name=/dev/sdX --attribute-walk
[ again, the syntax keeps changing in different udev
releases ].
I key my rules by the subsytem (usb), kernel (sd?1), and
ATTRS(product) with repeated rules for product values of
USB Flash Memory, DISK 2.0, and EHCI Host Controller - in
my case
these are all duplicates for different sticks, so I can
only ever
attach one stick at a time at /dev/stick.
?en
--
das eine Mal als Trag?die, das andere Mal als Farce
--
The problem is now solved.
I think I should have mentioned that ever since LFS6.3 I have always built my
systems on USB sticks and made them bootable. In fact I have never installed
LFS on my hard drive. I'm guessing but that could be the reason why my USB
sticks always show up as /dev/ub. The bootable USB stick shows up as /dev/uba1
with subsequent USB sticks showing up as /dev/ubb1 /dev/ubc1 etc.
However this Sandisk Cruzer Micro USB stick although generating /dev/ubb has
never generated /dev/ubb1 when plugged into a PC. Hence the
OPTIONS+=all_partitions in my rule on my LFS6.4 system.
The strange thing is that this Sandisk Cruzer Micro USB that's giving me all
this trouble is actually a bootable USB stick in it's own right with LFS6.5 on
it and it boots up ok with a perfectly good EXT3 filesystem.
Now I don't know why but everything I tried yesterday didn't work but
everything I tried today did. In my rule I use the
ATTRS{serial}==435217202CF5 option to specify this particular USB stick
and the NAME option to create the /dev/cruzusb file and the shell script in the
RUN+= option, which didn't run yesterday but is now working, creates the
/dev/cruzusb1 file which means I can now mount the filesystem ok.
I didn't think there was any specific udev log file but I thought I'd ask just
too make sure.
Thanks for your help and suggestions,
Gary
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: glibc
Mike McCarty wrote: CDO is like OCD, but the letters are in the right order. Isn't OCD a required trait to build LFS? :) -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: glibc error again
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Bill Cunningham bill...@suddenlink.net wrote: I have a livecd of lfs. I think that will do. now if I could just figure out how to get the system running with it. I will look closely at the docs. As long as that LiveCD is of LFS 6.3, you are fine. -- William Immendorf The ultimate in free computing. Messages in plain text, please, no HTML. GPG key ID: 1697BE98 If it's not signed, it's not from me. -- Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master. Richard Stallman -- Are you a Gmail user? Please read this important notice: http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/jstrap/gmail?31450. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: glibc
Bruce Dubbs wrote: Mike McCarty wrote: CDO is like OCD, but the letters are in the right order. Isn't OCD a required trait to build LFS? :) -- Bruce Not required... but it sure helps!!! -- Eric Plummer anadox...@gmail.com -- Messages in plain text, please, no HTML. No top posting, please. -- -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: glibc error again
William Immendorf wrote: On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Bill Cunningham bill...@suddenlink.net wrote: I have a livecd of lfs. I think that will do. now if I could just figure out how to get the system running with it. I will look closely at the docs. As long as that LiveCD is of LFS 6.3, you are fine. Now it's not glibc I am concerned about my new builds of c++ and gfortran compilers are failing. C is the only thing that works. and the g++-3.2.2 that came with RH9. I'm using it to compile gcc-4.5.3 and 4.6.1 and running into the same problem. Can't find libstd++.so.6 or a shared like that. The thing is it's right there and the dynamic linker sees it. Maybe ld isn't seeing it. Something's not right. Bill -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: glibc error again
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 18:02:58 -0400
Bill Cunningham bill...@suddenlink.net wrote:
Now it's not glibc I am concerned about my new builds of c++ and
gfortran compilers are failing. C is the only thing that works. and
the g++-3.2.2 that came with RH9. I'm using it to compile gcc-4.5.3
and 4.6.1 and running into the same problem. Can't find libstd++.so.6
or a shared like that. The thing is it's right there and the dynamic
linker sees it. Maybe ld isn't seeing it. Something's not right.
Hi. I haven't been following this discussion, and I only skimmed over
the mails, but could you please explain in what order are you building
stuff, as well as where your stuff is and exactly which thing is where.
This looks similar to a problem I used to have when I would try to
build a complete system, with a toolchain minisystem, in the wrong
place.
To wit, if you build the toolchain minisystem, chroot, then build the
system glibc in /{,usr}, you will have no problems. But, if you try to
build it in some other place: /some-other-place, the process will fail.
If you did stuff by the book, make sure to see if you properly
adjusted/readjusted the compiler. See chapter 6.10.
--
-Aleksandar Kuktin
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: glibc error again
Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011 18:02:58 -0400
Bill Cunningham bill...@suddenlink.net wrote:
Now it's not glibc I am concerned about my new builds of c++ and
gfortran compilers are failing. C is the only thing that works. and
the g++-3.2.2 that came with RH9. I'm using it to compile gcc-4.5.3
and 4.6.1 and running into the same problem. Can't find libstd++.so.6
or a shared like that. The thing is it's right there and the dynamic
linker sees it. Maybe ld isn't seeing it. Something's not right.
Hi. I haven't been following this discussion, and I only skimmed over
the mails, but could you please explain in what order are you building
stuff, as well as where your stuff is and exactly which thing is
where.
This looks similar to a problem I used to have when I would try to
build a complete system, with a toolchain minisystem, in the wrong
place.
To wit, if you build the toolchain minisystem, chroot, then build the
system glibc in /{,usr}, you will have no problems. But, if you try to
build it in some other place: /some-other-place, the process will
fail.
If you did stuff by the book, make sure to see if you properly
adjusted/readjusted the compiler. See chapter 6.10.
Right now lfs is on hold. I'm just trying to build a native compiler
such as 4.5.3 or 4.6.1 and binutils-2.21.1. For my system to compile lfs
stuff on. I build it and install it in usr/local (remember this right now
has nothing to do with lfs) and I only get a working C compiler though I
used --enable-languages=c,c++ maybe I should go to http://gcc.gnu.org
Bill
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
GCC pass 1 - .lib is missing in gmp dir
I got the -lgmp not found error while compiling the GCC. So I tired to find the mpc/config.log to know the exact problem but I couldn't find the log file. But I did check the gmp directory that .lib is missing. Also I did check the another version of gmp (gmp-5.0.2) and .lib is also not there in that directory. So is this right? I am confused. So let me know if somebody faced the same problem and how to resolve the same? Thanks -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
